Brand Controversies Tracker

Ben & Jerry's filed a federal lawsuit against its parent company, Unilever, alleging that the parent company silenced the brand's attempts to call for a ceasefire in Gaza. The lawsuit claims Unilever breached the terms of a 2022 legal settlement by blocking the independent board's public statements regarding Palestinian refugees and human rights. This internal conflict highlights ongoing tensions regarding the brand's social mission and its corporate autonomy.

Ben & Jerry's independent board sued parent company Unilever, alleging suppression of statements on Palestinian rights and Trump-era immigration — testing the "independent board" acquisition clause.

French prosecutors expanded an investigation into Nestlé Waters regarding the use of prohibited treatment methods, such as UV lamps and carbon filters, for its mineral water brands like Perrier and Vittel. In mid-2024, it was reported that the company reached a high-value settlement (CJIP) to resolve allegations of fraud and environmental infractions related to these illicit purification techniques. The controversy highlights systemic regulatory non-compliance in the company's bottled water division.

In 2024, a proposed class action lawsuit was filed against Who Gives A Crap in the U.S. alleging that the company's marketing of its toilet paper as '100% recycled' and environmentally superior was false or misleading because the product is packaged in plastic and may not meet consumer expectations of recyclability. The suit claims the company engaged in greenwashing by deceptively promoting its environmental benefits.

In May 2024, the Supreme Court of India revived a class-action lawsuit filed by the central government against Nestlé India seeking damages for alleged unfair trade practices and misleading advertisements related to Maggi noodles. The case stems from long-standing allegations regarding excessive lead content and the presence of MSG despite 'No added MSG' labels. This development signifies a major legal escalation in one of the brand's largest markets regarding food safety standards.

Nestlé was ordered by French authorities to suspend production at several wells providing water for the Perrier brand due to fecal contamination and bacterial risks linked to extreme weather events. The company was forced to destroy approximately two million bottles of water as a precautionary measure following a formal decree by the regional health agency. This incident raised significant concerns regarding the safety and environmental resilience of Nestlé's water sources.

An investigation by Public Eye and the International Baby Food Action Network revealed that Nestlé adds significant amounts of sugar and honey to infant milk and cereal products sold in low- and middle-income countries, while products in European markets remain sugar-free. This practice contradicts WHO guidelines aimed at preventing obesity and chronic diseases in children. The report sparked widespread public health concerns regarding double standards in nutrition labeling and product formulation.

Changing Markets and BMJ investigations documented Nestlé pushing high-sugar baby cereals in low- and middle-income markets vs healthier variants sold in wealthy countries.

In April 2024, Unilever UK issued a precautionary recall for certain batches of Magnum Almond Ice Cream Sticks due to the possible presence of plastic and metal pieces. The Food Standards Agency (FSA) issued an alert stating that the presence of these foreign materials made the product unsafe to eat. The company apologized and worked with retailers to remove the affected products from shelves.

The UK's Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) banned a YouTube ad for L’Oréal’s Elvive brand for misleading consumers about its environmental impact. The ruling stated that claims of 'carbon neutral' status were not sufficiently substantiated and failed to account for the full lifecycle of the product. This was part of a broader regulatory crackdown on vague environmental marketing.

Former employees of The Body Shop initiated legal action against the company after being made redundant during the administration process. The claims allege that the brand failed to follow statutory redundancy consultation procedures (protective awards) when firing staff at the head office and closed retail locations. Legal firms representing the workers argue that the sudden nature of the layoffs violated UK labor laws.

In early 2024, a report by environmental organizations highlighted concerns regarding Unilever's use of sachet packaging in Southeast Asia, leading to formal complaints about the company's circular economy claims. Critics argued that Unilever’s marketing of sachet collection schemes as 'recycling' was misleading, given the technical and economic difficulties of processing the multi-layered plastic waste. This led to increased scrutiny from NGOs regarding the brand's plastic reduction targets.

The Body Shop ceased all operations in the United States and filed for bankruptcy protection in Canada, leading to the immediate closure of dozens of stores. The company cited a lack of liquidity and the inability to pay vendors after the UK parent company entered administration. This resulted in hundreds of workers losing their jobs without notice in the North American market.

Reports emerged following the insolvency filing alleging that millions of pounds were missing from The Body Shop’s accounts prior to its collapse. Administrators from FRP Advisory began investigating the 'shortfall' in cash, questioning the financial handling by previous owners and the transition period under Aurelius. The investigation focuses on whether funds were inappropriately diverted before the UK arm was declared insolvent.

Following the administration filing, it was reported that The Body Shop had failed to pay millions in rent across its UK store portfolio. Landlords and retail property groups initiated legal concerns and eviction discussions as the administrators moved to shutter nearly half of the brand's UK outlets to cut costs. This caused significant disruption for commercial property owners and retail park operators.

The Body Shop's UK operation officially entered administration, putting approximately 2,000 jobs and 197 stores at risk. FRP Advisory was appointed to oversee the process after the company faced significant financial distress and failed to secure a rescue deal following its acquisition by Aurelius. This move marked a major collapse for the high street brand known for its ethical stance.

The Body Shop entered UK administration, threatening dozens of stores and hundreds of jobs — raising questions about long-term stewardship under successive owners.

In December 2023, the UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) launched a formal investigation into Unilever over concerns it may be overstating the environmental friendliness of certain products. The regulator is examining whether Unilever uses vague or misleading claims, such as 'natural' or 'clean,' and if imagery like green leaves unfairly influences consumers. This probe is part of a wider crackdown on greenwashing in the household essentials sector.

A report and subsequent journalistic investigations in late 2023 highlighted ongoing human rights concerns in palm oil plantations in Malaysia and Indonesia that supply major FMCG companies, including L’Oréal. The reports documented cases of debt bondage, withheld passports, and unsafe working conditions for migrant workers. L'Oréal was named as a major purchaser from refineries linked to these systemic labor abuses.

Throughout 2023 and 2024, thousands of new lawsuits were added to a massive multidistrict litigation (MDL) against L’Oréal and other manufacturers. The plaintiffs allege that chemical hair straightening products caused uterine cancer, ovarian cancer, and other reproductive health issues. The litigation reached a significant scale following a 2022 NIH study, with the court overseeing thousands of active claims as of late 2023.

In late 2023, environmental groups and investigative reports questioned the validity of 'water saver' claims made by L’Oréal brands. The complaints centered on whether the technology truly reduced overall water consumption at a systemic level or if the marketing exaggerated the environmental benefits. This led to increased scrutiny from French consumer watchdogs regarding the brand's 'sustainable' technology pivots.

A class-action lawsuit progressed in 2023 alleging that L'Oréal-owned CeraVe misled consumers by marketing products as having 'natural' benefits while containing synthetic ingredients. The plaintiffs argued that the branding and ingredient lists were contradictory, leading to premium pricing for non-natural products. The litigation highlights ongoing consumer protection risks regarding 'clean beauty' definitions.

In July 2023, Ukraine's National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) added Unilever to its 'International Sponsors of War' list. The agency cited Unilever's continued operations in Russia and the payment of significant taxes to the Russian state following the invasion of Ukraine. This designation resulted in widespread public criticism and pressure from human rights groups regarding the company's ethical footprint.

Estée Lauder brands (MAC, Clinique, Bobbi Brown, La Mer) remain sold in mainland China, which historically triggered post-market animal testing.

L'Oréal faces litigation related to talc-based cosmetics, echoing wider industry concerns about asbestos contamination in cosmetic-grade talc.

A Strategic Organizing Center analysis of OSHA data found Amazon warehouse serious-injury rates roughly double the non-Amazon warehousing industry.

A 2023 investigation by Forbes Advisor scrutinized Ritual’s marketing tactics, specifically their use of the term 'clinical study' and 'traceable' ingredients. The report highlighted concerns that while the brand emphasizes transparency, its marketing can lead consumers to believe their supplements provide unique health outcomes that are not uniquely supported by their specific clinical data compared to generic alternatives. This raised questions about potential 'health-washing' in the supplement industry.

Blueland, alongside other brands, supported a formal request to the EPA to tighten the definition of 'polymers' under the Toxic Substances Control Act. The controversy centers on whether the PVA/PVOH film used in laundry pods should be classified as a microplastic, with Blueland advocating for more rigorous oversight of these materials to prevent environmental accumulation.

Following a voluntary recall in late 2022, Unilever faced multiple consumer class-action lawsuits in 2023 alleging that its dry shampoo products, including brands like Dove and Suave, contained benzene, a known human carcinogen. Plaintiffs alleged that the company failed to warn consumers about the presence of the chemical and the potential health risks. One such consolidated class action continued through US courts during early 2023.

Blueland has been a primary vocal proponent in a campaign claiming that Polyvinyl Alcohol (PVA) used in competing laundry pods does not fully biodegrade in wastewater treatment plants, contributing to plastic pollution. While not a lawsuit against Blueland, the brand is at the center of this industry-wide scientific controversy regarding the greenwashing of 'dissolvable' plastics.

Break Free From Plastic's annual brand audit repeatedly ranks Unilever among the top branded plastic polluters globally.

A US National Labor Relations Board hearing officer found Amazon violated federal labour law during the JFK8 Staten Island union election.

PETA lists L'Oréal as a company that continues to permit animal testing where required by law (notably mainland China imports), despite public "no-testing" statements.

The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) raised concerns about Allbirds' sustainability claims in its 2021 IPO prospectus, specifically regarding its 'Sustainability Principles and Objectives' framework. Following regulatory intervention, Allbirds modified its documentation to clarify that it could not guarantee compliance with these principles. This action was part of a broader crackdown on corporate greenwashing in financial disclosures.

A consumer filed a class action lawsuit alleging that Allbirds misled the public regarding its carbon footprint calculations and the treatment of sheep in its supply chain. The plaintiff argued the company's 'sustainable' marketing didn't account for the full environmental impact of wool production or the 'ZQ' certification's actual oversight of animal welfare. The lawsuit was eventually dismissed by a federal judge in 2022.

NRDC and Stand.earth reports repeatedly named P&G as a major driver of Canadian boreal forest degradation via virgin-pulp tissue supply chains.

In 2021, the Norwegian Consumer Authority (Forbrukertilsynet) received a complaint against Who Gives A Crap for alleged greenwashing in its marketing. The complaint challenged claims that the company's products are '100% sustainable' or have 'zero environmental impact', arguing that such absolute environmental claims are unsubstantiated and misleading under Norwegian marketing law.

The watchdog group Good On You and various sustainability experts criticized Everlane for marketing its 'ReNew' recycled plastic collection as a total solution without addressing microplastic shedding. Critics argued the brand's focus on recycled content served as greenwashing while they continued to increase overall production volumes.

The National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs challenged several of Ritual's advertising claims, including assertions that its multivitamins were 'scientifically developed' and 'clinically proven' to fill nutrient gaps. Ritual was advised to discontinue or modify certain marketing claims that implied its specific formula was superior to others without sufficient comparative evidence. Ritual agreed to comply with NAD’s recommendations regarding their advertising language.

A majority of P&G shareholders voted in favour of a resolution demanding stronger deforestation and boreal-forest sourcing safeguards — a rare rebuke of management.

RAN's "Keep Forests Standing" scorecard flagged Unilever for weak enforcement of no-deforestation commitments in its palm supply chain.

Following public outcry over worker treatment, Everlane hired an outside law firm to investigate its internal culture. The investigation concluded that while there was no illegal harassment, the company leadership failed to create a diverse and inclusive environment and had inconsistent management practices that harmed employee well-being.

Former employees under the group 'Ex-Everlane' published a manifesto alleging a culture of systemic racism and professional gaslighting at the company. The document detailed instances where Black employees were excluded from meetings and lacked growth opportunities, contradicting the brand's 'Radical Transparency' marketing.

In 2020, Everlane laid off nearly 300 employees, including a significant portion of its customer experience team that was in the process of unionizing. The Communications Workers of America (CWA) filed a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board, alleging the company used the COVID-19 pandemic as a cover to illegally target pro-union workers.

In 2020, the company faced a trademark opposition from a U.S. entity over its brand name, which was deemed potentially offensive or vulgar. The dispute was resolved without litigation, but it highlighted the regulatory and legal hurdles the brand faced in certain jurisdictions.

Open Farm voluntarily recalled a specific lot of its Freeze-Dried Raw Harvest Chicken Recipe for dogs due to concerns over potentially elevated levels of Vitamin D. While no illnesses were reported, excess Vitamin D can lead to serious health issues in canines such as kidney failure. The recall was initiated after a third-party lab test identified the discrepancy in the single batch.

In 2018, Stasher, Inc. entered into a settlement agreement regarding allegations that certain products failed to provide required warnings under California's Proposition 65. The dispute specifically concerned the alleged presence of Diisononyl phthalate (DINP) in specific components of their reusable storage bags. As part of the settlement, the company agreed to provide warnings or ensure products met specific 'Reformulation Standards'.

Nestlé (now BlueTriton) was found to have extracted San Bernardino National Forest water for years under a 1988 permit that had lapsed, during a state drought.

In July 2017, Green Toys voluntarily recalled approximately 4,800 4-Pack Sand Play Sets sold exclusively at Target. The recall was issued because the small boat-shaped sieve could break, releasing small parts that pose a choking hazard to young children. The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) announced the recall, and Green Toys offered a full refund to consumers.

Along with many other green-marketing companies, Dr. Bronner's labeling practices have been reviewed by the FTC in relation to 'Green Guides' compliance. While not resulting in a formal fine for Dr. Bronner's specifically, the company has been a central figure in industry-wide debates regarding what constitutes 'natural' versus 'synthetic' processing. The company proactively defends its use of potassium hydroxide and other necessary soap-making agents that activists sometimes challenge.

A class action alleged L'Oréal marketed Lancôme and L'Oréal Paris "anti-aging" cosmetics with unsubstantiated efficacy claims.

CEO David Bronner was arrested in Washington, D.C. after locking himself in a steel cage in front of the White House to harvest industrial hemp as a protest against federal drug laws. The protest was intended to draw attention to the absurdity of banning the domestic cultivation of industrial hemp, which the company imported for its soaps. While an act of civil disobedience rather than a scandal, it resulted in legal proceedings and significant public controversy.

The Center for Environmental Health (CEH) filed a lawsuit against Dr. Bronner's and several other personal care brands, alleging they labeled products as 'organic' despite containing ingredients not approved for organic use under California law. Dr. Bronner's argued that their labels were accurate under different standards, but eventually reached a settlement to resolve the labeling disputes. This case highlighted the lack of uniform federal standards for organic claims in personal care products.

Dr. Bronner's faced scrutiny and internal conflict regarding the implementation of 'Fair for Life' certification standards across its global supply chain, specifically concerning the complexity of certifying smallholder farmers in diverse regions. While the company is a leader in fair trade, these challenges involved navigating regulatory requirements for worker compensation and land use in developing nations. The company has since worked to strengthen these standards, but the transition period saw various compliance complaints.